Joel R. Glucksman
Partner
201-896-7095 jglucksman@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Supreme Court Clarifies Bankruptcy Court Powers
Authors: Joel R. Glucksman, Donald Scarinci
Date: June 19, 2014
Key Contacts
Back
The Supreme Court clarified a prior ruling on June 9 that put limits on bankruptcy judges’ powers, according to The Wall Street Journal. The unanimous ruling in the case of Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Peter H. Arkison clarifies a 2011 ruling as to on which claims the bankruptcy may give a final ruling and on which it may not.
The key issue at stake is the difference between bankruptcy judges and district judges, the news source explained. District judges are Article III judges – they are confirmed by the senate and serve for life – whereas bankruptcy judges are not. In 2011, the Supreme Court ruled that bankruptcy judges do not possess the authority to issue final rulings on certain claims because of this inferiority. Whether a bankruptcy court can make a ruling on the basis of litigant consent – in which both parties agree to let the court make a final judgment.
According to Forbes, the Supreme Court ruling on June 9 said narrowly that Executive Benefits Insurance Agency – allegedly funded with a debtor’s fraudulent conveyances – had gotten the benefit of an Article III judge’s review, despite disagreeing with the authority of the bankruptcy court in that case. However, the Court specifically and intentionally did not resolve the issue of litigant consent.
“The court specifically said it was not resolving the important issue the case presented, which is whether even with a party’s consent bankruptcy judges can enter final judgment,” Douglas Hallward-Driemeier of Ropes & Gray, lawyer for the losing party, EBIA, told the news source. “One of the reasons that is so important is it also calls into question the ability of magistrate judges to enter final judgments.”
If you have any questions about this post or would like to discuss your company’s creditors’ rights and bankruptcy matters , please contact me, Joel R. Glucksman at www.ScarinciHollenbeck.com.
- Practices: Bankruptcy & Creditors' Rights
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Related Posts
See all
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
Author: Dan Brecher
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
Author: Ronald S. Bienstock
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
Author: Patrick T. Conlon
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Supreme Court Clarifies Bankruptcy Court Powers
Author: Joel R. Glucksman, Donald Scarinci
The Supreme Court clarified a prior ruling on June 9 that put limits on bankruptcy judges’ powers, according to The Wall Street Journal. The unanimous ruling in the case of Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Peter H. Arkison clarifies a 2011 ruling as to on which claims the bankruptcy may give a final ruling and on which it may not.
The key issue at stake is the difference between bankruptcy judges and district judges, the news source explained. District judges are Article III judges – they are confirmed by the senate and serve for life – whereas bankruptcy judges are not. In 2011, the Supreme Court ruled that bankruptcy judges do not possess the authority to issue final rulings on certain claims because of this inferiority. Whether a bankruptcy court can make a ruling on the basis of litigant consent – in which both parties agree to let the court make a final judgment.
According to Forbes, the Supreme Court ruling on June 9 said narrowly that Executive Benefits Insurance Agency – allegedly funded with a debtor’s fraudulent conveyances – had gotten the benefit of an Article III judge’s review, despite disagreeing with the authority of the bankruptcy court in that case. However, the Court specifically and intentionally did not resolve the issue of litigant consent.
“The court specifically said it was not resolving the important issue the case presented, which is whether even with a party’s consent bankruptcy judges can enter final judgment,” Douglas Hallward-Driemeier of Ropes & Gray, lawyer for the losing party, EBIA, told the news source. “One of the reasons that is so important is it also calls into question the ability of magistrate judges to enter final judgments.”
If you have any questions about this post or would like to discuss your company’s creditors’ rights and bankruptcy matters , please contact me, Joel R. Glucksman at www.ScarinciHollenbeck.com.